A day after New York Supreme Court Justice Juan Merchan held a hearing regarding former President Donald Trump’s bid to delay or dismiss the “hush money” case against him, the judge issued a gag order on the candidate.
“Given that the eve of the trial is upon us, it is without question that the imminency of the risk of harm is now paramount,” the judge wrote.
Judge Merchan had said in a hearing last year that he would not be entering a gag order at the time, but the order comes after two other courts have issued gag orders on President Trump that have been upheld by appeals panels.
Specifically, President Trump will be prohibited from making statements or directing others to make public statements about known or likely witnesses in relation to the case, jurors or prospective jurors, and members of court and district attorney staff, family members of counsel or staff “if those statements are made with the intent to materially interfere with … counsel’s or staff’s work in this criminal case, or with the knowledge that such interference is likely to result.”
The order is modeled after another gag order on President Trump, though the prohibition on statements about “prospective jurors” appears to be broader than previous orders.
Related Stories
The Manhattan District Attorney’s office had requested the gag order in February to last the duration of the trial, citing other prosecutors’ requests for gag orders on the former president.
“The freedom of speech guaranteed by the First Amendment and State’s interest in the fair administration of justice are implcated by the relief sought. The balancing of these interests must come with the highst scrutiny,” Judge Merchan wrote.
Prosecutors had presented a large tranche of social media posts President Trump made in relation to the case, including attacks on witnesses’ credibility and character.
The judge said it was notable that President Trump did not deny having made these statements “or the reported effect those statements had on the targeted parties.
Defense attorneys had argued that as the presumptive Republican nominee in the 2024 presidential election, President Trump has a First Amendment right to speak about his legal cases and defend himself in the public forum, and that Americans have a First Amendment right to hear his side of the story.
The judge disagreed, finding the nature of the comments beyond protection.
“These extrajudicial statements went far beyond defending himself against ‘attacks’ by ’public figures,’” the judge wrote. “Indeed, his statements were threatening, inflammatory, denigrating, and the targets of his statements ranged from local and federal officials, court and court staff, prosecutors and staff assigned to the cases, and private individuals including grand jurors performing their civic duty.”
Last April, when the judge declined to enter a gag order, he warned the parties against making inflammatory statements about the case. Defense attorneys argued the warning was sufficient deterrence and that President Trump has refrained from targeting individuals involved in the case.
The judge said in his latest order he was “unpersuaded” this was so, citing the “nature and impact” of statements President Trump made in a separate case in federal court.
April 15 Trial
The trial was originally scheduled for March 25, but the defense had received more than 100.00 pages of discovery early March.
During the hearing, he said the defense had made serious accusations that were not backed by caselaw. He found that the prosecutors had met their discovery obligations and were not at fault for federal attorneys providing discovery so late.
He ended the hearing by ordering an April 15 trial, earlier than the planned April 25 trial to avoid overlap with Passover.
President Trump, who has been charged with 34 counts of falsifying business records by the Manhattan District Attorney, said in a press conference after the hearing that he didn’t believe the case could go to trial next month.
“I don’t know that you’re going to have the trial,” he told reporters. “I don’t know how you can have a trial like this in the middle of an election, a presidential election … I don’t know that you’re going to have a trial, I think we’re going to get some court rulings.”
Original News Source Link – Epoch Times
Running For Office? Conservative Campaign Consulting – Election Day Strategies!